BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, J. - (1.) ALL these mandamus appeals along with a separate writ application have been assigned to this Bench for hearing inasmuch as common questions of law arise for determination in all these matters.
(2.) THE mandamus appeals are directed against the common judgment dated November 19, 2003 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court by which His Lordship disposed of nine different writ applications heard analogously by directing the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to accord sanction of the building plans to the respondents without realising any Drainage Development Fees and to refund such fees if already realised. In other words, His Lordship was of the view that the Kolkata Municipal Corporation had no right to realise the Drainage Development Fees as no such right has been conferred upon the Corporation by virtue of the provisions of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act or the Rules or the Regulations famed thereunder. In the other writ application, a different learned Single Judge referred the matter to the Division Bench, as by that time, all those writ applications were disposed of and nine mandamus appeals had been preferred by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation against the previously mentioned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. All these matters were accordingly heard analogously and we propose to dispose of all these matters by this common judgment.
(3.) FIRST , we proceed to decide the nine mandamus appeals preferred by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation against the common judgment passed by the learned Single Judge.;